What is Rajamannar Committee (1969-1971)?
Historical Background
Key Points
12 points- 1.
One key recommendation was that residuary legislative powers should be vested in the States. Currently, if a subject is not explicitly mentioned in the Union, State, or Concurrent Lists of the Seventh Schedulethe part of the Constitution that divides powers between the Union and the States, the power to legislate on it rests with the Union Parliament. The Committee argued this should be changed to empower States.
- 2.
The Committee advocated for the deletion of Article 356, which allows the President's Rule to be imposed on a State. Alternatively, it suggested strict limitations on its use to prevent arbitrary dismissal of State governments. This was driven by concerns that the central government was misusing this provision for political purposes. For example, between 1950 and 1967, Article 356 was invoked 13 times, but in the two years 1967-1969 it was invoked 11 times.
- 3.
The Rajamannar Committee argued that the Planning Commission should not dominate fiscal relations between the Union and the States. They felt that the Planning Commission, which allocated funds to states, had become too powerful and reduced the financial autonomy of the states. They wanted states to have more control over how they used plan funds.
- 4.
The Committee recommended larger tax devolution to the States, meaning a greater share of the taxes collected by the Union government should be transferred to the States. They also suggested a reduction in discretionary grants, which are grants given by the Union government to the States at its discretion. This was aimed at providing States with more predictable and reliable sources of revenue.
- 5.
The Committee called for a stronger role for the Finance Commission. The Finance Commission is a constitutional body that recommends how tax revenues should be divided between the Union and the States. The Rajamannar Committee wanted to enhance its role to ensure a fairer distribution of resources.
- 6.
Regarding the appointment of Governors, the Committee recommended that the State government should be consulted before the appointment is made. They also argued that the Governor should not act as an agent of the Centre, but rather as a neutral constitutional head of the State. This was intended to prevent the Governor from interfering in the affairs of the State government on behalf of the Union government.
- 7.
The Committee suggested the establishment of an Inter-State Council as a mandatory body, not just a discretionary one. The Inter-State Council is a forum for discussion and coordination between the Union and the States. Making it mandatory would ensure regular dialogue and cooperation.
- 8.
The Committee proposed that certain subjects in the Union Listthe list of subjects over which the Union Parliament has exclusive power to legislate should be transferred to the Concurrent Listthe list of subjects over which both the Union Parliament and State legislatures can legislate. This would give States more power to legislate on these subjects.
- 9.
The Rajamannar Committee's recommendations differed significantly from the later Sarkaria Commission report. While the Rajamannar Committee advocated for greater state autonomy, the Sarkaria Commission took a more balanced approach, emphasizing the need for both a strong Centre and strong States.
- 10.
One practical implication of the Rajamannar Committee's recommendations, if implemented, would be that State governments would have greater financial resources and more control over their own affairs. This could lead to more effective governance and development at the State level.
- 11.
A key controversy surrounding the Rajamannar Committee was that it was appointed by a State government, leading some to question its impartiality. However, the Committee's report was a well-researched and comprehensive analysis of Centre-State relations, and its recommendations have been influential in shaping the debate on Indian federalism.
- 12.
The UPSC examiner often tests the understanding of the Rajamannar Committee's recommendations in the context of Indian federalism and Centre-State relations. Questions may focus on the specific recommendations, their rationale, and their relevance to contemporary issues.
Recent Developments
10 developmentsIn 2023, the Tamil Nadu government appointed a High-Level Committee on Union-State Relations, following the precedent of the Rajamannar Committee, to further examine and suggest improvements to Indian federalism.
The report submitted by the High-Level Committee on Union-State Relations in Tamil Nadu advocates for a fresh federal compact and a 'structural reset' of Indian federalism, echoing the concerns raised by the Rajamannar Committee decades ago.
The recent report suggests doing away with the Centre's power to redraw state boundaries without consulting the states, a recommendation that aligns with the Rajamannar Committee's emphasis on state autonomy.
The report also proposes restoring subjects like education back to the domain of states and checking the Centre's encroachment on state subjects like health and agriculture, reflecting the Rajamannar Committee's concerns about excessive centralization.
The Supreme Court has been increasingly involved in mediating constitutional confrontations between the States and their Governors, highlighting the ongoing relevance of the Rajamannar Committee's concerns about the role of the Governor.
Recent judicial pronouncements, such as the State of Punjab v Principal Secretary to the Governor of Punjab case in 2023, have addressed the need for expediency in gubernatorial action on bills, a topic that the Rajamannar Committee also touched upon.
The debate around 'One Nation, One Election' has sparked discussions about the balance of power between the Union and the States, a core issue that the Rajamannar Committee sought to address.
The Goods and Services Tax (GST) Council, established under the 101st Constitutional Amendment, is often cited as a model of cooperative federalism, but debates persist about excessive central control, echoing the Rajamannar Committee's concerns about fiscal centralization.
The abrogation of Article 370 and the bifurcation of Jammu and Kashmir into Union Territories have raised questions about the federal principles underpinning the Indian constitutional framework, highlighting the ongoing tension between central power and state autonomy.
The ongoing discussions about cooperative vs. competitive federalism reflect the enduring relevance of the Rajamannar Committee's efforts to strengthen cooperative federalism in India.
This Concept in News
1 topicsFrequently Asked Questions
61. What's the most common MCQ trap regarding the Rajamannar Committee, specifically concerning Article 356?
The most common trap is misinterpreting the Committee's stance on Article 356. Students often incorrectly assume the Committee advocated for its amendment, when in reality, it recommended its *outright deletion* or, failing that, stringent limitations on its use. Examiners exploit this by offering options that suggest 'amendment' as the primary recommendation.
Exam Tip
Remember: Rajamannar Committee wanted Article 356 gone (or severely restricted), not just tweaked. Think 'delete' or 'limit,' not 'amend'.
2. The Rajamannar Committee and the Sarkaria Commission both dealt with Centre-State relations. What is the KEY difference in their approaches?
While both examined Centre-State relations, the Rajamannar Committee, appointed by the Tamil Nadu government, adopted a more radical approach, advocating for significantly greater state autonomy, including the deletion of Article 356 and vesting residuary powers in the states. The Sarkaria Commission, appointed by the central government, took a more balanced approach, aiming to strengthen Centre-State cooperation *within* the existing constitutional framework, without advocating for fundamental changes to the balance of power.
Exam Tip
Think of Rajamannar as 'state autonomy first,' and Sarkaria as 'cooperative federalism within the existing structure'.
3. The Committee recommended transferring some subjects from the Union List to the Concurrent List. Why is this significant, and what's an example of a subject they might have considered?
Transferring subjects to the Concurrent List is significant because it allows states to legislate on those subjects, increasing their autonomy. While the report doesn't explicitly list subjects for transfer, considering the context of the time and the Committee's focus on state autonomy, subjects like education or certain aspects of economic planning, which were heavily influenced by the Centre, might have been considered. This would allow states to tailor policies to their specific needs.
Exam Tip
Remember the lists: Union = Centre only, State = States only, Concurrent = both. Rajamannar wanted to shift power from Union to Concurrent.
4. How did the political climate of the late 1960s in India influence the formation and recommendations of the Rajamannar Committee?
The late 1960s saw the rise of regional parties, particularly in South India, who advocated for greater state autonomy. There was a growing sentiment that the central government was becoming too powerful and was encroaching upon the powers of the states. The Rajamannar Committee was a direct response to these concerns, appointed by the Tamil Nadu government to articulate and propose solutions for greater state autonomy. The recommendations, therefore, reflected this desire to decentralize power and strengthen the federal structure.
5. The Rajamannar Committee's recommendations were never fully implemented. What are some of the main reasons why its report was largely ignored by the central government?
Several factors contributed to the non-implementation: * Central Government Resistance: The central government was unlikely to cede significant power to the states, especially concerning financial resources and legislative authority. * Lack of Consensus: There was no widespread consensus among all states regarding the Committee's recommendations. Some states may have been wary of such radical changes to the federal structure. * Political Instability: The political landscape in India was quite turbulent during that period, with frequent changes in government, making it difficult to pursue long-term reforms based on the Committee's report.
- •Central Government Resistance
- •Lack of Consensus
- •Political Instability
6. Given the recent emphasis on cooperative federalism, do you think the core recommendations of the Rajamannar Committee are still relevant today? Why or why not?
The relevance of the Rajamannar Committee's recommendations is debatable. * Arguments for Relevance: The call for greater state autonomy and fiscal decentralization remains relevant, especially as states face increasing developmental challenges. The concerns about the misuse of Article 356 and the need for a more robust Inter-State Council are also still pertinent. * Arguments Against Relevance: The emphasis on cooperative federalism suggests a more collaborative approach, which might be undermined by the Rajamannar Committee's more confrontational stance. Some argue that excessive decentralization could weaken national unity and hinder effective policy implementation at the national level.
- •Arguments for Relevance
- •Arguments Against Relevance